St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1887-03-08
THE SUPREME COURT.
1t Renders Several Decisions In
vOlving Important Legal Oues-

VOIVlnE I'm p0rtant Legal ones.
lions.
WASHINGTON, March THE supreme
court reassembled to-day after the February
recess. All the justices were in their seats
except Justice Woods. who is still in Cali
fornia. Decisions were rendered in twenty
eight cases, of which the following are
those of most general interest:
No. 92-EXecutors of Elias Speidel, de-
ceased, against the trustees of the Harmony
society OF Beaver county, Pa: appeal from
the United States circuit court for the west
erll district OF Pennsylvania. This was suit
brought 10y former member of the Harmony
community to recover what he claimed as his
individual share in the community property.
The appellant maintains his suit against the
trustees upon the ground that the trust is
NOT A CHARITY
in the legal sense; that the members of the
society are equitable tenants in common of
the property held in trust. and that the trust
is unlawful because founded in fraud and
against public policy and should therefore be
dissolved. This court, without considering
the questions thus raised as to the nature of
the community and of the trust, decided that
inasmuch as plaintiff withdrew from the COM
munity in 1913 and never returned to it, and
for more than fifty years took no steps 10 OBJ
tain an accounting from the trustees, or to
assert his alleged rights he is not now en-
titled to relief,
No. 7O3, Richard Viterbo. appellant, against
Samuel Friedlander; appeal from the United
States circuit court for the Eastern district of
Louisiana. Viterbo, the appellant, leased
from Friedander for a term of FIVE years a
sugar plantation, situated on the bank of the
Mississippi river, in the parish OF St. Charles,
La. In the spring the following year there
was an extraordinary rise of the river, which
oyerfowed the plantation and rendered it
wholly unfit for the purpose for which it had
been leased. Viterbo thereupon brought this
suit to have the lease annulled. This court is
Of opinion that the lease being of sugar
plantation for the purpose of being used to
cultivate sugar cane, injuries to the planta-
ton by reason of the overflow and to its
capacity for producing cane and sugar,
amounted to a partial destruction of the
PLANTATION, or what is the same thing in legal
effect to make it cease to be fit for the pur-
poses for which it was leased; that these in
juries were caused by fortutuous and un-
forseen event, and that under the principles
OF civil law as established in Louisiana the
plaintiff is entitled to have the lease aunuled.
The appeal of the court below dismissing the
bill is reversed and the case remanded for fur
ther proceedings
No. 1926. The Accident Insurance Com
pany of North America. plaintiff, in error,
against Loretta NJ. Crandall; in error to the
United States circuit court for the district OF
Illinois. This is suit upon policy of acct
dent insurance, and presents the question
whether
A POLICY OF INSURANCE
against ''bodiiy injuries" created through ex-
ternal, accidental and violent means and &C.
casioning death or complete disability to do
business; and providing that this insurance
shall not extend to death or disability which
may have been caused wholly or in part by
bodily infirmiteS diseases or by the taking
OF poison or by suicide or by Self-infiicted in
juries, covers death by hanging ones self
while insane. This court holds that the in
vestigation is to a great extent determined
by previous decisions as to the effect of
policy of life insurance which provides that
it shall be null and void if the assured ''shall
die by suicide ''shall die by his own
hands, This court has repeatedly and
uniformly held that such a provision
not containing the words ''sane Or insane"
does not include seif-killing by an insane
person. There can be no doubt in the pres
ent state of law that Crandal did not die by
suicide within the meaning of this policy:
and the same reasons are conclusive against
holding that he died by ''self-inf1icted in
juries," "self-killing. +" suicide dying By
his own hands," cannot be predicated by an
insane person, no more can self inflicted
injuries" for in either case it is not the act
of himself. Nor does the case come within
the clause which provides that 1.-The insur-
ance shall not extend to death or dis
ability which may have been caused
wholly or in part by bodily infrmties or
disease. The words "5Odly infrmitieS or
disease do not include insanity. Upon the
question raised as o the effect of the closing
sentence of the policy insuring Crandall
against bodily njuries effected through ex-
Iernal, accidental and violent means the
court holds that this sentence does not speak
of what the I'M ury is caused by but looks
only to the means by which it is effected. No
one doubts that hanging is violent means of
death. AS it affects the body from without it
is external. and according to the decisions as
to suicide under policies of life insurance, it
cannot, when done by an insane person. be
held to be other than accidental. The judg-
ment of the circuit court in favor of the
plaintiff was correct and is affirmed
No. S84-Thomas Baldwin, plaintiff in error,
against j. c. Franks, United States marshal,
in error to the circuit court of the United
States for the district of California This
case presents new phase of
THE CHINESE QUESTION,
and involves the rights of the Chinese under
the federal laws. On the 18th of February,
1876, Baldwin. the plaintiff in error, and other
citizens Of the mining town OF Nicolaus,
Suffer county, Cal, drove out OF the town
with force and violence a number of resident
Chinese by throwing them on board steamer
barge lying in Feather river, and sending
them out of the limits of the town aud the
county. Baldwin was arrested under d
warrant issued by commissioner of the
circuit court. charging him with entering
into conspiracy with certain other persons
10 deprive these Chinese of the equal protec-
tor of the laws and of equal privileges and
immunities under the laws. Baldwin applied
to the circuit court for discharge
upon writ of habeas corpus but
WAS refused. and he now aDpeals IN